Misery visits all of us in our own time. Lets face it, happiness and fulfillment are impossible to feel 100% of the time. Such despondency can actually be fought off though. Mainly misery can be avoided by always finding something to accomplish or learn. It could be fought off by reading a new book, or cooking a new recipe, or spending time with a pet. Those always work for me. People only feel miserable because they allow themselves to.
It is said that misery loves company. I'm of the belief that this phrase was coined by those miserable people who spent as much time around others as they could, so they could spread to others the despair that they, themselves, felt. That being said one must always make an effort to avoid those afflicted with misery. You let a miserable friend in to comfort them and by the time they leave they'll have you contemplating a suicide pact. I know, I make it sound like a disease, right? Well it is. Misery is an emotional disease. Misery is an emotional black hole which sucks in productivity, strength and joy and spits out dependency, weakness and any negative emotion you'd rather not be feeling.
And believe it or not, the miserable are not to be blamed for this. They're just carriers. Plague dogs infected at the source. There isn't only one source of this epidemic either, that's why it's so scary. It can come from the media in the form of standards of beauty that are impossible to live up to. It can come from performance at work that remains un-recognized. The reasons are varied. The cure can be even more so.
Misery is an emotional disease, as I've already established. So the only way to get rid of it is an emotional cure. I mentioned learning something new. I also mentioned spending time with a beloved pet (not necessarily a non-human one). Nearly anything that can remind you of your self-worth can blow away the blues (not the music). However, it must remain said that no one can do this for you. If you weren't aware of that self-worth before, it's going to be even more difficult finding a reason to feel good about yourself and your life. These are primarily the people who end up losing all hope and looping a rope around their neck.
So keep in mind, that misery comes to us all. But only the strong brush it off like an annoying case of the common cold. The weak will carry it with them everywhere and spread it around just to validate their own feelings of worthlessness and try to make others feel as bad (or worse than) themselves. The weak despair of even making something of themselves or solving their problems. The strong will never question the purpose of their lives. The weak will question whether there even is a purpose. Just remember, everyone's life has problems, but all problems are fixable.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Way of the Left Hand Buddha.
I might go out on a limb and say that many people on the Left Hand Path are consumed by hate of some sort. I know I was. I used to hate theists of any sort. Didn't matter if they were poly- or mono- theistic. Whether they were pagan or Abrahamic, it didn't matter to me. I hated any one who worshiped any external spiritual force. Looking back on it, I'm not sure why. I think I just told myself that it was because I didn't like their voluntary self-slavery, or because they couldn't think of their own beliefs, but had to have their opinions dictated to them. Though it occurs to me as I write this, Atheists can't really think of their own beliefs either. So they don't bother to believe in anything. I think I might have just been filled with a shiftless hatred because maybe I thought it gave me some kind of drive.
It took me some time to realize that Satanism gave me a greater purpose: myself. People who followed a religion that worshiped some kind of god or spirit didn't have the same purpose I did. Some people are just too humble to be self-serving. So without themselves or a god to give them purpose, many people turn to theistic religion to give them greater reason to exist. I realized a little while back that this was actually more pitiable than it was infuriating. The only reason I hated them was because I was being xenophobic, and hating anyone who was not like me. Some people hate other people for various reasons. But let me ask: If you took all the energy you expend just hating others and instead focused it on the achievement of your goals or maybe showing your love to those who deserve it, how much more fulfilling do you think your life could be?
Now don't get me wrong. I'm no peace loving hippie! There are those I hate with a blinding rage. There are some who inspire such anger in me, that I literally don't know what to do with myself. But I can avoid this if I want to, though not if I need to. Even when I find myself surrounded by those I hate, I find that if I just ignore them they don't bother me. It's when they choose to trouble me and decline my request to be left in peace, that I find myself stirred into anger.
And there's another thing people often forget. There is a difference between anger and hate, everyone. Because I love quoting from the dictionary, here's the difference between the two:
Anger
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, affliction, anger, from Old Norse angr grief; akin to Old English enge narrow, Latin angere to strangle, Greek anchein
Date: 14th century
1 : a strong feeling of displeasure and usually of antagonism
2 : rage.
Seems pretty basic, right? Well here's anger's evil twin.
Hate
Pronunciation: \ˈhāt\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English hete; akin to Old High German haz hate, Greek kēdos care
Date: before 12th century
1 a : intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury b : extreme dislike or antipathy : loathing
2 : an object of hatred.
They seem pretty similar don't they?
Well I can say this. The definition of hate implies anger taken to it's extreme. I think it was the Greeks who coined the phrase "Everything in moderation". So taking anger to it's extreme until it becomes hatred doesn't really help anybody does it?
I won't say that your life will be better if you just let go of your hate. It's impossible to do just one thing which, on it's own, improves the quality of your life. It is entirely possible though to let go of that hate. I will tell you this, though: since I've let go of my unconditional hatred, I feel as though a huge burden has been lifted from my life. I for one have found that tranquility is much more preferable to impotent rage. Because when you hate a portion of the whole world and you're unable to do anything about it, what does that accomplish? Maybe you find it gives you focus for your goals. However, like theism, that focus is external. Eventually you find yourself a slave to that hatred, all your actions are motivated by it. Before you realize it, that hate becomes your god.
One need not pursue Zen to feel peace. Nor must you smoke pot or forsake physical possessions. But it helps if you start looking at that which you hate as being beneath your notice. Letting go of one's hate is not as easy as dropping a suitcase. But it is as easy as neglecting that which you find distasteful.
It took me some time to realize that Satanism gave me a greater purpose: myself. People who followed a religion that worshiped some kind of god or spirit didn't have the same purpose I did. Some people are just too humble to be self-serving. So without themselves or a god to give them purpose, many people turn to theistic religion to give them greater reason to exist. I realized a little while back that this was actually more pitiable than it was infuriating. The only reason I hated them was because I was being xenophobic, and hating anyone who was not like me. Some people hate other people for various reasons. But let me ask: If you took all the energy you expend just hating others and instead focused it on the achievement of your goals or maybe showing your love to those who deserve it, how much more fulfilling do you think your life could be?
Now don't get me wrong. I'm no peace loving hippie! There are those I hate with a blinding rage. There are some who inspire such anger in me, that I literally don't know what to do with myself. But I can avoid this if I want to, though not if I need to. Even when I find myself surrounded by those I hate, I find that if I just ignore them they don't bother me. It's when they choose to trouble me and decline my request to be left in peace, that I find myself stirred into anger.
And there's another thing people often forget. There is a difference between anger and hate, everyone. Because I love quoting from the dictionary, here's the difference between the two:
Anger
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, affliction, anger, from Old Norse angr grief; akin to Old English enge narrow, Latin angere to strangle, Greek anchein
Date: 14th century
1 : a strong feeling of displeasure and usually of antagonism
2 : rage.
Seems pretty basic, right? Well here's anger's evil twin.
Hate
Pronunciation: \ˈhāt\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English hete; akin to Old High German haz hate, Greek kēdos care
Date: before 12th century
1 a : intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury b : extreme dislike or antipathy : loathing
2 : an object of hatred.
They seem pretty similar don't they?
Well I can say this. The definition of hate implies anger taken to it's extreme. I think it was the Greeks who coined the phrase "Everything in moderation". So taking anger to it's extreme until it becomes hatred doesn't really help anybody does it?
I won't say that your life will be better if you just let go of your hate. It's impossible to do just one thing which, on it's own, improves the quality of your life. It is entirely possible though to let go of that hate. I will tell you this, though: since I've let go of my unconditional hatred, I feel as though a huge burden has been lifted from my life. I for one have found that tranquility is much more preferable to impotent rage. Because when you hate a portion of the whole world and you're unable to do anything about it, what does that accomplish? Maybe you find it gives you focus for your goals. However, like theism, that focus is external. Eventually you find yourself a slave to that hatred, all your actions are motivated by it. Before you realize it, that hate becomes your god.
One need not pursue Zen to feel peace. Nor must you smoke pot or forsake physical possessions. But it helps if you start looking at that which you hate as being beneath your notice. Letting go of one's hate is not as easy as dropping a suitcase. But it is as easy as neglecting that which you find distasteful.
Monday, January 18, 2010
One man's tragedy is irrelevant to me
I recently made a statement that went something like this: "Life is tough. The strong deal with it in their own way. The weak strive to make their difficulties the problems of the strong." The funny thing is that if the weak stopped wasting all the effort they expend trying to hoist their problems onto others, and instead used it to solve their own problems, they could be strong too. Yet they don't. We seem to live in a world where the victim is valued more than those who take care of themselves. Why is it so great to be incapable and dependent on others?
A natural disaster recently befell a certain country. There was an incredibly high death toll, and people are still suffering difficulties from it. For all intents and purposes this is a third world country. Half the country is illiterate. Nothing of irreplaceable value comes from this place. So this natural disaster (in this case, an earthquake) takes place and suddenly the world takes notice.
An especially interesting fact is that now that this country has been struck with hard ship, we suddenly take pity on them and send them money for things they had little to none of. Suddenly clean water and medical care is available here. Much of it from the United States. Funny how they were a poor and broke down slum of a nation for over a century, and no one cared. The death toll in this country has always been pretty high due to poor health care (about 30,000 people per year are afflicted with Malaria). I find it strange how the leaders of said nation have either done nothing to develop a stable economy for their country or have tried and failed to do so. Now the leaders of this country will go down in history as the one(s) who got their "proud nation through this time of trials". The people who survived the quake are being praised as strong and courageous. So they're praised for not dying from something they didn't know was going to happen? Yeah well I flew a kite in a hurricane! What does that say about me! How great am I for knowing what I was getting into?
It must also be said that this country is not a developing nation. They are not developing. No progress has been made by this country to improve it's existence (efforts, maybe, but no progress). In fact, the quality of life for this place may have even gotten worse over the years. The really sad thing is that 80% of the people in this country who are college educated, emigrate to the United States. So the people who could improve it actually choose not to. So that means that this nation is left weakened by the people currently populating or who used to populate it.
So, we've established that this certain nation is weak, and that nature has pummeled the hell out of it. What do they do now? Well they never quite had the facilities to help themselves even before the earthquake, so it stands to reason they don't have the resources necessary to clean up the damage now. Thankfully we have the media to pass the buck onto the U.S. government. No, really! That's just fine that we're now expected to take care of places that were never even stable in the first place. That's kind of like paying to fix up a dilapidated old house, and then doing nothing with it. That right there is an investment with zero chance of return. But yet it's our responsibility to look after places where "tragedy" strikes. Odd.
Some might say that the whole incident is tragic because so many people died. That's a damn joke. People are killed in large numbers every day, and no one says jack. There are three reasons for this.
1.) When people get thrown in mass graves in S. America or Africa (a daily occurrence, I assure you), there isn't always a reporter to catch it on video, and people only know about current events via the media. But just because you didn't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
2.) Another reason people are sitting up and taking notice is because natural disasters of this magnitude don't happen every day. Every once in a while though, you get a massive tsunami, hurricane, or earthquake and everyone's interested. People like to hear about things that don't happen often....I'm not sure why.
3.) This disaster happened practically right in our back yard. The Caribbean (where this disaster took place) is technically a part of N. America. Since N. America is part of the continent that we (American citizens) live in we feel that it's relevant to our lives, and so should feel bad or otherwise have an opinion.
I'll tell you folks: I've never been to this country. I've never wanted to. I don't know anyone from there, or who ever has been there. I've been aware of this place and it's horrendous poverty since I was in the fourth grade. I didn't care about it then, and haven't since. I don't care what anyone says; if they were a strong nation with strong people, they'd be able to recover from this problem on their own. As it is, I don't see how the earthquake that hit them is the United States' problem, or the tax-payers' for that matter.
A natural disaster recently befell a certain country. There was an incredibly high death toll, and people are still suffering difficulties from it. For all intents and purposes this is a third world country. Half the country is illiterate. Nothing of irreplaceable value comes from this place. So this natural disaster (in this case, an earthquake) takes place and suddenly the world takes notice.
An especially interesting fact is that now that this country has been struck with hard ship, we suddenly take pity on them and send them money for things they had little to none of. Suddenly clean water and medical care is available here. Much of it from the United States. Funny how they were a poor and broke down slum of a nation for over a century, and no one cared. The death toll in this country has always been pretty high due to poor health care (about 30,000 people per year are afflicted with Malaria). I find it strange how the leaders of said nation have either done nothing to develop a stable economy for their country or have tried and failed to do so. Now the leaders of this country will go down in history as the one(s) who got their "proud nation through this time of trials". The people who survived the quake are being praised as strong and courageous. So they're praised for not dying from something they didn't know was going to happen? Yeah well I flew a kite in a hurricane! What does that say about me! How great am I for knowing what I was getting into?
It must also be said that this country is not a developing nation. They are not developing. No progress has been made by this country to improve it's existence (efforts, maybe, but no progress). In fact, the quality of life for this place may have even gotten worse over the years. The really sad thing is that 80% of the people in this country who are college educated, emigrate to the United States. So the people who could improve it actually choose not to. So that means that this nation is left weakened by the people currently populating or who used to populate it.
So, we've established that this certain nation is weak, and that nature has pummeled the hell out of it. What do they do now? Well they never quite had the facilities to help themselves even before the earthquake, so it stands to reason they don't have the resources necessary to clean up the damage now. Thankfully we have the media to pass the buck onto the U.S. government. No, really! That's just fine that we're now expected to take care of places that were never even stable in the first place. That's kind of like paying to fix up a dilapidated old house, and then doing nothing with it. That right there is an investment with zero chance of return. But yet it's our responsibility to look after places where "tragedy" strikes. Odd.
Some might say that the whole incident is tragic because so many people died. That's a damn joke. People are killed in large numbers every day, and no one says jack. There are three reasons for this.
1.) When people get thrown in mass graves in S. America or Africa (a daily occurrence, I assure you), there isn't always a reporter to catch it on video, and people only know about current events via the media. But just because you didn't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
2.) Another reason people are sitting up and taking notice is because natural disasters of this magnitude don't happen every day. Every once in a while though, you get a massive tsunami, hurricane, or earthquake and everyone's interested. People like to hear about things that don't happen often....I'm not sure why.
3.) This disaster happened practically right in our back yard. The Caribbean (where this disaster took place) is technically a part of N. America. Since N. America is part of the continent that we (American citizens) live in we feel that it's relevant to our lives, and so should feel bad or otherwise have an opinion.
I'll tell you folks: I've never been to this country. I've never wanted to. I don't know anyone from there, or who ever has been there. I've been aware of this place and it's horrendous poverty since I was in the fourth grade. I didn't care about it then, and haven't since. I don't care what anyone says; if they were a strong nation with strong people, they'd be able to recover from this problem on their own. As it is, I don't see how the earthquake that hit them is the United States' problem, or the tax-payers' for that matter.
Lords of Creation
Here's a thought. Humans are a part of the Animal Kingdom. More specifically, we belong in the following categories:
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Subclass: Theria
Infraclass: Eutheria
Order: Primates
Suborder: Anthropoidea
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: sapiens.
So there you have it. Humans are animals. Not only that, we are a part of only one (out of 5) kingdom. Yet we carry ourselves with some inflated sense of self-importance. Why is that? Is it because of our intelligence? Well that's simply evolutionary. Creatures evolve different survival mechanisms. That's why there's so few creatures that hunt elephants. Because they travel in groups, and are so big and heavy, it's hard to catch them off guard and kill them in conventional ways for lions, hyenas, crocodiles, etc. Evolution gave them just what they needed to thrive, and serve their part in the ecosystem.
Now why is it, that when we humans refer to the world at large we like to separate ourselves from animals. Everyone does this. Everyone. We all see the world in terms of 'people' and 'animals'. Some people say it's due to our intelligence. That seems kind of backward as we seem just intelligent enough to know what behaviors will do damage to our species (both individuals and the collective) and ecosystem. Yet we seem just stupid enough to engage in these behaviors anyway. Murder and war are two of my favorite examples, since they are unique to primates (and the former to humans only). Some people will scoff at this and say that animals kill other animals all the time. This is true; lions kill hyenas, both of them kill water buffalo, and hippos will kill anything that invades it's personal space (make no mistake, hippos will fuck your shit up). All this inter-species fighting though, is for food, survival, or the establishment of feeding territory. Even then, the most killing that takes place between different species is when a carnivore is hunting, since a successful hunt, by definition, must end with the death of the prey in question.
But contrary to popular belief, intra-species killings rarely take place. It's true, animals fight all the time. Sometimes this is for dominance, sometimes for mating privileges, and for a whole slew of other reasons. But this rarely ends in the death of said animals. They only fight until it can be clearly determined who the stronger one is, then the weaker creature often submits. Most creatures understand that needlessly killing does nothing to further the species, and so rarely engage in such. Humans, however either generally don't understand this or don't care.
Now I am all in favor of Darwinism, but not to the extant that I would kill someone just because he is weaker than I am. I seem just smart enough to know that if anybody is contributing something to my society and I exterminate him/her then I rob my tribe (see: family, friends, city, etc) of whatever my victim was providing. Furthermore; I understand that if I do harm to my tribe, then in the long run I do harm to myself.
So how is it that the whole of the Animal Kingdom seems smart enough to thrive in every respect except where humanity enters as a variable? We're the smartest terrestrial creatures in the Animal Kingdom today. We have the ability to understand and create abstract concepts like mathematics, art, agriculture, and philosophy. We even have the mental faculties to make our environment adapt to our presence, a trait which seems unique to humanity. So why is it, if we're so evolved, that we destroy everything we touch?
It's all a frightening concept to consider. There seems to be no solution that doesn't appear bleak and horrific. If I'm mistaken, though, please tell me how.
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Subclass: Theria
Infraclass: Eutheria
Order: Primates
Suborder: Anthropoidea
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: sapiens.
So there you have it. Humans are animals. Not only that, we are a part of only one (out of 5) kingdom. Yet we carry ourselves with some inflated sense of self-importance. Why is that? Is it because of our intelligence? Well that's simply evolutionary. Creatures evolve different survival mechanisms. That's why there's so few creatures that hunt elephants. Because they travel in groups, and are so big and heavy, it's hard to catch them off guard and kill them in conventional ways for lions, hyenas, crocodiles, etc. Evolution gave them just what they needed to thrive, and serve their part in the ecosystem.
Now why is it, that when we humans refer to the world at large we like to separate ourselves from animals. Everyone does this. Everyone. We all see the world in terms of 'people' and 'animals'. Some people say it's due to our intelligence. That seems kind of backward as we seem just intelligent enough to know what behaviors will do damage to our species (both individuals and the collective) and ecosystem. Yet we seem just stupid enough to engage in these behaviors anyway. Murder and war are two of my favorite examples, since they are unique to primates (and the former to humans only). Some people will scoff at this and say that animals kill other animals all the time. This is true; lions kill hyenas, both of them kill water buffalo, and hippos will kill anything that invades it's personal space (make no mistake, hippos will fuck your shit up). All this inter-species fighting though, is for food, survival, or the establishment of feeding territory. Even then, the most killing that takes place between different species is when a carnivore is hunting, since a successful hunt, by definition, must end with the death of the prey in question.
But contrary to popular belief, intra-species killings rarely take place. It's true, animals fight all the time. Sometimes this is for dominance, sometimes for mating privileges, and for a whole slew of other reasons. But this rarely ends in the death of said animals. They only fight until it can be clearly determined who the stronger one is, then the weaker creature often submits. Most creatures understand that needlessly killing does nothing to further the species, and so rarely engage in such. Humans, however either generally don't understand this or don't care.
Now I am all in favor of Darwinism, but not to the extant that I would kill someone just because he is weaker than I am. I seem just smart enough to know that if anybody is contributing something to my society and I exterminate him/her then I rob my tribe (see: family, friends, city, etc) of whatever my victim was providing. Furthermore; I understand that if I do harm to my tribe, then in the long run I do harm to myself.
So how is it that the whole of the Animal Kingdom seems smart enough to thrive in every respect except where humanity enters as a variable? We're the smartest terrestrial creatures in the Animal Kingdom today. We have the ability to understand and create abstract concepts like mathematics, art, agriculture, and philosophy. We even have the mental faculties to make our environment adapt to our presence, a trait which seems unique to humanity. So why is it, if we're so evolved, that we destroy everything we touch?
It's all a frightening concept to consider. There seems to be no solution that doesn't appear bleak and horrific. If I'm mistaken, though, please tell me how.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Goals
Goals. We all have them. While some may seem incredibly stupid, they help keep us from stagnating. The question is how do you put a quantifiable limit on your hopes and desires? I was recently asked to write down my goals for after I graduate from college. Which college? Community college? Under-graduate college? Or maybe Graduate School? That wasn't much of a problem really. The problem was that I felt like I was asked to write down my soul (if there is such a thing) and commit it to paper. Despite what anyone else tells you, you can tell a lot about a person by the goals they want to achieve. People that want to be a doctor, for example, want to make a lot of money and/or want to help people. You get a good feel for personality, but not so much for aptitude.
My problem, though, was that my goals are numerous. And the things you can learn about me from my goals do not speak well to the quality of my character. I want to own my own veterinary practice. You might think that I want to help all the cute fuzzy animals and blah blah blah. This is not the case, though. I want to enter the medical field, like my mother and sister before me. However, I have no desire whatever to help people. In fact, most people I encounter, I don't really like. I want to own my own practice, because I want people to call me 'sir'. I want my employees to know that I hold their livelihoods in my hands, and to be able to hire or fire people. I want minions to do my bidding. And that bidding isn't to help people, but to help the animals our ancestors have domesticated. This is taking responsibility for our actions. Now, anyone reading this might think that I'm an asshole or a bad person, and they're probably right. I'm not really concerned with the opinions of people who don't hold control over my life, though.
Don't get me wrong, I do want to help animals. But not because I want to save Bambi's mom. Mostly, my concern for the Animal Kingdom is because animals don't manifest the sort of behaviors that humans do. Guilt, religion, war, politics, compassion, beauty, fear; all of these are foreign to the rest of the Kingdom in which we belong. Animals eat when they're hungry, they fight to preserve the natural order which keeps them alive, they sleep when they're tired, they fornicate when they're secure enough to raise offspring, they migrate or hibernate when food is scarce. It's all as simple as that. That's not enough for humanity though. Our goal seems to be to find and pursue a higher reason for life.
This is where the joke is on us. Survival, like the pursuit of power, is it's own purpose. It does not need to be justified, because it is the justification which we seek. So we create all these complex concepts, and make a simple reason complicated. We go to war, and we say to ourselves 'These enemies believe something different than us, so we must do honor and praise to our god by destroying and converting our enemies' or 'this country is attacking this other country and that's wrong'. Why not just admit 'We see our enemies as a threat to our continued existence, so we are attacking them' or 'this country has some resource or territory that we need/want for our continued success, so we are going to war with them'? It would certainly be more honest, if not much easier to understand.
The point is, we have a tendency to obfuscate our goals. if not from each other, then definitely from ourselves. If you truly wish to understand yourself, then you must ask yourself why you do what you do. Why do you want what you desire? Then when you discover the answers to those questions, investigate the roots of them. I think most of you will discover those roots to be the desire to live and thrive. Once you've realized that, then you're one step closer to becoming one with the animals from whom we descend.
My problem, though, was that my goals are numerous. And the things you can learn about me from my goals do not speak well to the quality of my character. I want to own my own veterinary practice. You might think that I want to help all the cute fuzzy animals and blah blah blah. This is not the case, though. I want to enter the medical field, like my mother and sister before me. However, I have no desire whatever to help people. In fact, most people I encounter, I don't really like. I want to own my own practice, because I want people to call me 'sir'. I want my employees to know that I hold their livelihoods in my hands, and to be able to hire or fire people. I want minions to do my bidding. And that bidding isn't to help people, but to help the animals our ancestors have domesticated. This is taking responsibility for our actions. Now, anyone reading this might think that I'm an asshole or a bad person, and they're probably right. I'm not really concerned with the opinions of people who don't hold control over my life, though.
Don't get me wrong, I do want to help animals. But not because I want to save Bambi's mom. Mostly, my concern for the Animal Kingdom is because animals don't manifest the sort of behaviors that humans do. Guilt, religion, war, politics, compassion, beauty, fear; all of these are foreign to the rest of the Kingdom in which we belong. Animals eat when they're hungry, they fight to preserve the natural order which keeps them alive, they sleep when they're tired, they fornicate when they're secure enough to raise offspring, they migrate or hibernate when food is scarce. It's all as simple as that. That's not enough for humanity though. Our goal seems to be to find and pursue a higher reason for life.
This is where the joke is on us. Survival, like the pursuit of power, is it's own purpose. It does not need to be justified, because it is the justification which we seek. So we create all these complex concepts, and make a simple reason complicated. We go to war, and we say to ourselves 'These enemies believe something different than us, so we must do honor and praise to our god by destroying and converting our enemies' or 'this country is attacking this other country and that's wrong'. Why not just admit 'We see our enemies as a threat to our continued existence, so we are attacking them' or 'this country has some resource or territory that we need/want for our continued success, so we are going to war with them'? It would certainly be more honest, if not much easier to understand.
The point is, we have a tendency to obfuscate our goals. if not from each other, then definitely from ourselves. If you truly wish to understand yourself, then you must ask yourself why you do what you do. Why do you want what you desire? Then when you discover the answers to those questions, investigate the roots of them. I think most of you will discover those roots to be the desire to live and thrive. Once you've realized that, then you're one step closer to becoming one with the animals from whom we descend.
Monday, January 4, 2010
New Years means new hurts...learn to love it
Happy New Years to all (in all likelihood) ZERO of you actually reading this. Today we will cover something that everyone thinks about sometime: Morality.
Mirriam-Webster defines Morality as " 1 a : a moral discourse, statement, or lesson b : a literary or other imaginative work teaching a moral lesson
2 a : a doctrine or system of moral conduct b plural : particular moral principles or rules of conduct
3 : conformity to ideals of right human conduct
4 : moral conduct : virtue ".
All of this is, of course, contingent on what exactly the word 'moral' means. Now of course we all have an unconscious understanding of what the word entails, but for the sake of argument lets just formalize it here; "1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior c : conforming to a standard of right behavior d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment e : capable of right and wrong action "
Wowzers! That's a lot of unnecessary words for such a simple concept, huh? I bet if I'd have asked you (or any other layperson for that matter) what Morality is, you'd say something along the lines of "Doing what is Right or Good as opposed to doing Wrong or Evil". Am I wrong?
Anyway, everyone (or at least most of us) tries to be moral. And why shouldn't we? It feels good to be good. It gives us a feeling of greater purpose to give some money or food to the homeless or donate to a charity. It feels as though we are less beholden to our jobs or families, and more in tune with some benign spiritual force. But then, it feels even better to be moral within the boundaries of comfort or convenience doesn't it? When was the last time you literally gave the shirt off of your back? No one empties out the entirety of their wallet to anyone they don't think will pay them back. No one gives everything they have to those in need. Why not? Certainly if there is a god, he would bless yo greatly for your generosity. Or perhaps curse your selfishness. Yes, people give of themselves, but only because it gives them a sense of meaning, and meaning feels good. Let me tell you what feels even better than giving of yourself to others.
Giving of yourself to yourself. Let me let you in on a little secret. It's the reason I sometimes give something to a beggar. Every time you give them something, they feel ashamed. They feel like in return for your help they are having a bit of their dignity and self-respect ripped from them. They may feel like they owe you something, and of course they can't repay it, so that just makes them feel worse. Your morality and your charity dehumanizes them. So why not take that ten-spot you were going to give to some broken down hobo, and instead give it to someone who will actually appreciate it, and you, for your kindness? Get a six-pack and share it with a friend. That way you both get something and no one feels put out or looked down on.
We all do little "random acts of kindness" to convince ourselves that we (as individuals) are inherently good. We also do that because we're taught to, and routines are hard to break. But mostly we're doing moral things for our own peace of mind. Many people believe that if we act moral and other people act moral, we will all be safe. The fact is that this way of thought can get you eff-ing killed. The fact that we are expected to do good and expect that same behavior from others is, in fact, enabling those who would walk all over you to do just that. The mugger in the alley knows many people don't just go about with weapons on them at all times. This is because many people think that everyone not only knows the difference between right and wrong, but also concerns themselves with it. So why the need to arm themselves? And so the brutish thief knows that he can hold you up in relative safety, because you didn't expect anyone to so blatantly disregard what is right and threaten your life to steal your valuables.
So, in a sense morality actually does more to serve the immoral. Ironic, some would say; even surprising. There's a phrase most people learn in their youth that goes 'When someone slaps you across the cheek, turn the other cheek'. Another saying (known as the Golden Rule) is to 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you'. So these two sayings which supposedly encourage virtue, rob people of their self-assertion, and empower those who they call the wicked.
No other creature on earth acts this way, save man. This indicates that said behavior is unnatural. Hence this moral behavior is an abomination. Even in a work environment, if you restrain yourself with moral actions, you are not working to the best of your potential.
Now, dear reader, this is not to make you banish whatever system of morality you follow. But maybe you should follow what you feel, rather than what you are taught you feel. It's tough to tell the difference at first. It requires a lot of inner reflection. You may discover that you like to feel good, or like you've accomplished something. Maybe you need to find or create a system of morality that doesn't make you feel enslaved. I can't tell you what you really need. Only you can do that dear reader. But the next time you perform a "Random Act of Kindness" ask yourself, 'am I being a unique individual, or a tool for someone else's beliefs?'
The answer may shock and horrify you. But they say that the truth hurts.
Mirriam-Webster defines Morality as " 1 a : a moral discourse, statement, or lesson b : a literary or other imaginative work teaching a moral lesson
2 a : a doctrine or system of moral conduct b plural : particular moral principles or rules of conduct
3 : conformity to ideals of right human conduct
4 : moral conduct : virtue ".
All of this is, of course, contingent on what exactly the word 'moral' means. Now of course we all have an unconscious understanding of what the word entails, but for the sake of argument lets just formalize it here; "1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior c : conforming to a standard of right behavior d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment e : capable of right and wrong action "
Wowzers! That's a lot of unnecessary words for such a simple concept, huh? I bet if I'd have asked you (or any other layperson for that matter) what Morality is, you'd say something along the lines of "Doing what is Right or Good as opposed to doing Wrong or Evil". Am I wrong?
Anyway, everyone (or at least most of us) tries to be moral. And why shouldn't we? It feels good to be good. It gives us a feeling of greater purpose to give some money or food to the homeless or donate to a charity. It feels as though we are less beholden to our jobs or families, and more in tune with some benign spiritual force. But then, it feels even better to be moral within the boundaries of comfort or convenience doesn't it? When was the last time you literally gave the shirt off of your back? No one empties out the entirety of their wallet to anyone they don't think will pay them back. No one gives everything they have to those in need. Why not? Certainly if there is a god, he would bless yo greatly for your generosity. Or perhaps curse your selfishness. Yes, people give of themselves, but only because it gives them a sense of meaning, and meaning feels good. Let me tell you what feels even better than giving of yourself to others.
Giving of yourself to yourself. Let me let you in on a little secret. It's the reason I sometimes give something to a beggar. Every time you give them something, they feel ashamed. They feel like in return for your help they are having a bit of their dignity and self-respect ripped from them. They may feel like they owe you something, and of course they can't repay it, so that just makes them feel worse. Your morality and your charity dehumanizes them. So why not take that ten-spot you were going to give to some broken down hobo, and instead give it to someone who will actually appreciate it, and you, for your kindness? Get a six-pack and share it with a friend. That way you both get something and no one feels put out or looked down on.
We all do little "random acts of kindness" to convince ourselves that we (as individuals) are inherently good. We also do that because we're taught to, and routines are hard to break. But mostly we're doing moral things for our own peace of mind. Many people believe that if we act moral and other people act moral, we will all be safe. The fact is that this way of thought can get you eff-ing killed. The fact that we are expected to do good and expect that same behavior from others is, in fact, enabling those who would walk all over you to do just that. The mugger in the alley knows many people don't just go about with weapons on them at all times. This is because many people think that everyone not only knows the difference between right and wrong, but also concerns themselves with it. So why the need to arm themselves? And so the brutish thief knows that he can hold you up in relative safety, because you didn't expect anyone to so blatantly disregard what is right and threaten your life to steal your valuables.
So, in a sense morality actually does more to serve the immoral. Ironic, some would say; even surprising. There's a phrase most people learn in their youth that goes 'When someone slaps you across the cheek, turn the other cheek'. Another saying (known as the Golden Rule) is to 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you'. So these two sayings which supposedly encourage virtue, rob people of their self-assertion, and empower those who they call the wicked.
No other creature on earth acts this way, save man. This indicates that said behavior is unnatural. Hence this moral behavior is an abomination. Even in a work environment, if you restrain yourself with moral actions, you are not working to the best of your potential.
Now, dear reader, this is not to make you banish whatever system of morality you follow. But maybe you should follow what you feel, rather than what you are taught you feel. It's tough to tell the difference at first. It requires a lot of inner reflection. You may discover that you like to feel good, or like you've accomplished something. Maybe you need to find or create a system of morality that doesn't make you feel enslaved. I can't tell you what you really need. Only you can do that dear reader. But the next time you perform a "Random Act of Kindness" ask yourself, 'am I being a unique individual, or a tool for someone else's beliefs?'
The answer may shock and horrify you. But they say that the truth hurts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
